Simple crafting of a 4-3-3 DM

[Johnny Ace]

1 hour ago, HanziZoloman said:

@Johnny Ace did you used this formation at the Beginning of the youth challenge when your players were just awful like 4 marking or 3 passing?

I was using a 4-4-2 back in the "your team are awful" phase but they were never that bad 

[llama3]

Super thread @Johnny Ace - really well thought out and explained

[Johnny Ace]

Cheers @llama3

[loisvale]

Enjoyable read. Nice work.

Love the 433. Often have a midfield of DM(D), CM (S) and AP (S). Otherwise similar.  When I am trying to to be more attacking or defensive I change the duty on the CM. Will try some of the roles you have suggested and see how they work out. Particularly interesting to read how using DM(s) when using a Mez in the midfield 3 keep things together better. Some good learnings in here.

I love threads like this but am always interested to see ideas expanded to see how people use roles or TIs to dial risk up and down depending on the opponent (ie how to approach better opponents, similar opponents or teams you expect to beat). A great example that I often come across with tactics I have done myself is when I am being overwhelmed by a great team like Man City- pressing high and constantly pinching the ball of me. Not always obvious to me what I should be doing to slightly alter my tactic without making large changes to soak it up and hit on break. Hope that makes sense. 

[Johnny Ace]

1 hour ago, loisvale said:

Enjoyable read. Nice work.

Thank you! 

1 hour ago, loisvale said:

I love threads like this but am always interested to see ideas expanded to see how people use roles or TIs to dial risk up and down depending on the opponent (ie how to approach better opponents, similar opponents or teams you expect to beat). 

Makes perfect sense and it would be a really useful thread for the community. I've often thought of opening up a thread as more of a community project than anything, because doing x or y tweak vs a stronger team doesn't always work out as planned. I thought a community thread could work such as "I beat Man City, I did x and y and it really caught them out" sort of thing could give players some ideas. As a one off post it would be an absolutely massive task

I'm sure there was a thread on here, absolutely years ago, where people posted what was going wrong with their tactic and people gave them ideas to try, I either imagined it or can't find it for the life of me, but something similar to that could be fun 

[Justified]

I pretty much play the same way and always have in FM. I prefer having "my style" as I know how to tweak and adapt around it. I always have a higher tempo then default as I like to move the ball around quickly. Around that it depends on my team and the opposition. If I'm a good team and expect to dominate possession I will play with a Balanced mentality, push up (High LOE and DL) and have Counter Press + PooD. If I need to tone a bit because of my team or opposition I will remove the higher lines, PooD, Counter Press and tick counter. This means I sit deeper and don't press as high and play more direct. If I am expected to be dominated against I will go Cautious and add a more direct passing style. This means I sit lower still, more risk adverse, more compact and play even more direct.

Yes I don't have a lot of instructions selected however I can't detail every move I make because there are so many variables but the above is the jist anyways.

[loisvale]

@Johnny Ace
@Justified

Thanks both for the replies  That is is the sort of stuff that I find to be so useful. I have always been fairly decent at putting balanced roles together but can struggle in adapting in game to certain scenarios. Appreciate these thoughts  

 

[bosque]

On 02/04/2023 at 18:03, Johnny Ace said:

If I use a CM(A) or a MEZZ(A), I'll normally use a FB on that side, a role that'll be a be more cautious and won't stay as wide as a WB and/or a DM(S) type role to help plug that gap and keep the midfield a bit more compact

What are your thoughts on using an IWB to plug the gap left by a CM or MEZ on attack?

[Johnny Ace]

3 minutes ago, bosque said:

What are your thoughts on using an IWB to plug the gap left by a CM or MEZ on attack?

Nothing wrong with it, I just like my FBs and WBs to be out wide 

[Justified]

I'd also add you need a role who stays wider in the build up for that to work well. If you have a IF you'll probably get a congested channel.

[loisvale]

@Justified

was looking through some old threads today and came across your “Rome wasn’t built in a day” thread. Wish I had read it at the time! Is that how you still play today in terms of roles, shape TIs etc?

The content in there is exact what I was looking for and referring to above. I am always trying to build a base formation with simple TIs and PIs and then have a more positive attacking one and a more dialled down countering one in the two other slots. Any updates on your previous thread would be devoured by me. 

[Justified]

7 hours ago, loisvale said:

@Justified

was looking through some old threads today and came across your “Rome wasn’t built in a day” thread. Wish I had read it at the time! Is that how you still play today in terms of roles, shape TIs etc?

The content in there is exact what I was looking for and referring to above. I am always trying to build a base formation with simple TIs and PIs and then have a more positive attacking one and a more dialled down countering one in the two other slots. Any updates on your previous thread would be devoured by me. 

Ish. From memory I actually play even more simplistic since then. Still use a split press but TI's are only PooD, Higher Tempo, Distribute to the Defence, Counter-Press and a high block.

[loisvale]

On 24/04/2023 at 08:31, Justified said:

Ish. From memory I actually play even more simplistic since then. Still use a split press but TI's are only PooD, Higher Tempo, Distribute to the Defence, Counter-Press and a high block.

Been away for a few days but thanks for the reply. I have been trying your less complicated style which I do find interesting and effective. One question I would have is what is your thought process when you really need a goal towards the end of the game and you need to chase?

[Justified]

1 hour ago, loisvale said:

Been away for a few days but thanks for the reply. I have been trying your less complicated style which I do find interesting and effective. One question I would have is what is your thought process when you really need a goal towards the end of the game and you need to chase?

First I'd go up to Positive to make my play more direct and enable my players to take more risks. Next I'd move the DLPsu down to the DMC spot and change the MC role to B2B. This is so I get an additional runner moving forward. I'd change the CMat to MEZat and change the FBsu on the same side to FBat to create an overload on the flank. This an all out attack on my behalf and I only do this if desperately chasing.

If you just want to be more adventurous I'd do the same apart from the DLPsu to DMC spot shift. I would simply just change the DMCd to DMCsu so he gets more involved in the build up. The DMC will push up into midfield and create a sort of double pivot but also be more expansive in his passing. This is due to DMC's on defend duties + PooD meaning he helps play the ball out of defence. On support he'll be more direct in his passing.

[loisvale]

Brilliant. Thank you. Just the type of advice and content I was after. Appreciate it. 

[GonzaloFlores]

This thread has been a really good read. Really helpful for my own 433. I was guilty of clicking on evert TI possible but removing them and then slowly adding the few I actually needed has been really effective in helping to build the tactic how I want it.

I did have a question though. The original post was all about using wingbacks and then a tight midfield. The update changed this to fullbacks with a more creative midfield. I was wondering how you would build a tactic that was a mixture of both i.e. a wingback on one side and a full back on the other?

I have a very attacking LB (basically a winger who has decent marking and tackling) while my RB is very limited and is better and staying back and I want to play to both of their strengths if possible.

[Johnny Ace]

On 30/04/2023 at 23:59, GonzaloFlores said:

I did have a question though. The original post was all about using wingbacks and then a tight midfield. The update changed this to fullbacks with a more creative midfield. I was wondering how you would build a tactic that was a mixture of both i.e. a wingback on one side and a full back on the other?

I have a very attacking LB (basically a winger who has decent marking and tackling) while my RB is very limited and is better and staying back and I want to play to both of their strengths if possible.

You can mix and match Wingbacks and Fullbacks just fine for a simple, solid tactic

I like to start off with using the CM as cover for the side of the pitch the Wingback is on, so if the right back is a Wingback on Attack, I like to have a DM(D) and the CMR as a CM(S), basically a non fancy role that isn't going to roam, use excessive creative freedom or break forward. Then with the Fullback on the left, the CML can be a Roaming/ Advanced Playmaker or a BBM to offer something different to the team on that side of the pitch. If the Wingback and Fullback are on Support, I'm happy to use a DM(S) 

I'll try and come up with a couple of templates to add to the thread if it'll be helpful, it would sort of help round the thread out too to cover most scenarios   

[HanziZoloman]

Superb! Thanks man

[Johnny Ace]

4-3-3 Wingbacks and Fullbacks

You're not always in the situation where you're managing a squad with 2 Wingbacks or Fullbacks and it's very common to find yourself with a first choice Wingback and a first choice Fullback. What if you're facing injuries or suspensions?  Your back-up 33 year old left back can't play Wingback. That promising 17 year old in the U21s has bags of pace and your first choice Fullback is kicking off about moving to a bigger club, so you'll have to mix things up a bit 

Wingback (Support)/ Fullback (Support)

Nice and simple

It's pretty tame, especially that left hand side. I do love a Fullback, they do a nice safe job for your team, they move up field with the team supporting the midfield and defending the wide areas. Fantastic. Because of this, I'll want a bit more from the midfield, I won't need such a safe role in the left CM slot. The DM doesn't need to be as defensively responsible because our backs aren't that offensive

For this, I'll be using a Spearhead striker role so I don't want an all out role in midfield. A Roaming Playmaker, a Mezzala on Support, a Box-to-Box Midfielder would do fine but for a bit of variety I'll go will an Advanced Playmaker on Attack

 

It's not all that offensive of a role. It doesn't have Get Further Forward locked in, he's asked to Shoot Less Often which blunts the role compared to a CM(A) or MEZZ(A), the key thing here is the mentality boost. All in all, you're asking this player to do more for the team and be a bit more offensive than a standard CM(S)

 With his other personal instructions you're wanting dynamic runs from midfield, you want him making those passes into space and with his high mentality he'll find himself in and around the box and on the ball, he'll always be looking forward. The DM(S) and CM(S) tie the midfield up nicely  

To allow the AP(A) a bit of space and offer width on the left, I'll go with a Winger on Support, upfront a goal scoring AF(A) and on the right IF(S) 

Nice and simple, nothing crazy, you can just see that AP now popping up on the inside of the winger 

As a whole, the tactic offers a nice bit of variety with the use of the one "fancy" role. The Wingback providing width on the right, the Winger providing the width on the left, a tight midfield 3 with one them being an offensive creator and a front that all offer something different 

  

Spoiler

 

[Johnny Ace]

4-3-3 Wingbacks and Fullbacks

Wingback Attack this time, I'll try & keep it short and sweet, I was trying to keep it all on one post 

Wingback (Attack) / Fullback (Support)

  

We're going ultra aggressive with the Wingback now so I want the DM to sit and protect, with that I want simple roles in midfield, as a variant of the above lineup, I'll just move the AP down to Support 

Up front, no change needed, an IW(S) could be on the cards but I'd more than likely use a right footed player in the winger position  

Both are nice and simple but act well as good starting points wherever I may find myself

Spoiler

I plan on posting up a few more 4-3-3 DMs that include some more of the exotic roles and include the most deadly roles from centre midfield, the Mezzala and CM on Attack 

 

[bosque]

I think I'm in love with this thread  Dropping the AP from A to S is in direct correlation with dropping the DMs to A, right? To avoid the midfield being too far apart? 

[HanziZoloman]

Am 4.5.2023 um 19:48 schrieb Johnny Ace:

Up front, no change needed, an IW(S) could be on the cards but I'd more than likely use a right footed player in the winger position  

I don’t get it, you play a Winger right footed on the left to simulate a kind of IWs?

that’s interesting, because sometimes you just have just one left footer (for left W or right IWs) who is the best player and maybe two right footers for the same roles. (You get it?) combine the Problem you mentioned with FB/ WB, just one true WB (right) and simple FB (left). How do you mix things up in a 433?

If you play your left footed star on the right as IF/IW your missing the wide player on the left. If you playing him on the left, you either have another winger right which will limit your WB or you have a right footer cutting in. You still follow?

thanks 

[Johnny Ace]

9 hours ago, bosque said:

I think I'm in love with this thread  Dropping the AP from A to S is in direct correlation with dropping the DMs to A, right? To avoid the midfield being too far apart? 

Bingo  We all know how important the middle of the park is, keeping them together as a unit a) helps us keep the ball when we have it b) makes us harder to play through when we don't 

49 minutes ago, HanziZoloman said:

I don’t get it, you play a Winger right footed on the left to simulate a kind of IWs?

 Sort of yeah, he's not a full on Winger but not a full on IW either, he'll still stay wide on the ball and not invert as much 

I do the same with FBs at times too, rather than use an IWB, use a right footed player at left back instead for a similar effect

54 minutes ago, HanziZoloman said:

You still follow? 

I think so 

Basically, I try and use an IW/IF paired with a WB behind them and Wingers with a FB behind them. It's not a hard and fast rule it's just how I try and set up, like a WB and W or a FB and IW down a flank isn't a bad thing at all

In your case you have your right sided options, IF/IW and WB. On the left you have an IF/IW and a FB, that's fine, watch how they play together. The FB may drift infield at times but you can decide wether it's a good thing (an overload on one flank) or a bad thing (congestion)   

[Justified]

Some of these principles can be applied to the 4-4-2/4-4-1-1 as well. I'm not a huge two banks of four person however sometimes you end up at a club who can't facilitate playing a 4-3-3. If I do end up going that route I do play it as a 4-3-3 within the 4-4-2. One of the fullbacks would be attacking to get the width, the 2 MC's + one of the wide players would be my 3 i midfield. The other wideman would be my attacker. The make-up of the 2 up front can vary in terms of what you have but usually one is attacking the opposite side to the wide-man bombing into and the other player up front or in the AM strata would be supporting pulling it all together. Vice versa you could have the AM attacking and the lone striker up front is supporting. The makeup of your midfield would have to be suited to what you do up front but the possibilities are indeed endless to fit your team.

[Johnny Ace]

I use pretty much the same for 4-2-3-1s too @Justified, using the DMs to help set the backs ie I'm not going to go with a SV(A) and a WB(A) on one side of the pitch. Then set the rest of the lineup going forward or vice versa, I usually start out placing the key players 

[HanziZoloman]

That was a great piece of advice @Johnny Ace just had trouble to hold onto a lead in a game and sacrificed a striker for a supporting AM which made a midfield trio out of the duo and guess we where much harder to play through. 
Also your Tipps mentioned above are a ton of help. It’s so great how you take your time and discuss all our questions here with us. Thank you man 

[Johnny Ace]

15 minutes ago, HanziZoloman said:

That was a great piece of advice @Johnny Ace just had trouble to hold onto a lead in a game and sacrificed a striker for a supporting AM which made a midfield trio out of the duo and guess we where much harder to play through. 
Also your Tipps mentioned above are a ton of help. It’s so great how you take your time and discuss all our questions here with us. Thank you man 

Thanks! I just find it easier to keep things simple and don't go overboard, if you start having Mezzala's, BBM's and IWB's etc across your lineup, it's starts to complicate things, same with PIs and TIs 

[Old Scouser Tommy]

On 11/04/2023 at 06:39, crusadertsar said:

And yet I seem to come back to it every year! Just something wholesome about putting players in this formation. Speaks of a golden bygone era to me.

Same here. I'm always "I'm gonna do a back 2 with 3 Registas and all mad stuff". New Brighton save. guess what? 4-3-3!

 

[TheJanitor]

Hi @Johnny Ace, great thread as everyone said!

When playing with an old-fashioned #9 (ie a Poacher/Advanced Forward), is there a certain playing style that feel is more suitable to accommodate him?

[Johnny Ace]

11 hours ago, TheJanitor said:

Hi @Johnny Ace, great thread as everyone said!

When playing with an old-fashioned #9 (ie a Poacher/Advanced Forward), is there a certain playing style that feel is more suitable to accommodate him?

Thanks @TheJanitor!

I find they work well with most styles to be honest, they're probably not ideal if you're going for a Tika Taka style and there will probably be better options if you're really focused on possession styles 

They might struggle if you're a top team and others sit back against you but City don't have that problem with Haaland 

[TheJanitor]

1 hour ago, Johnny Ace said:

Thanks @TheJanitor!

I find they work well with most styles to be honest, they're probably not ideal if you're going for a Tika Taka style and there will probably be better options if you're really focused on possession styles 

They might struggle if you're a top team and others sit back against you but City don't have that problem with Haaland 

Thanks for replying. TBH Haaland would probably score 20+ playing at center back

What about slow poachers? I am playing with Rayo and the only option upfront is old man Falcao. The squad seems like a decent fit for 433, and being a below-average team, I guess there would be a lot of space behind the defensive line. It is probably not an ideal situation for such a player, do you think there is any other role someone like him can perform?

[Johnny Ace]

23 hours ago, TheJanitor said:

Thanks for replying. TBH Haaland would probably score 20+ playing at center back

What about slow poachers? I am playing with Rayo and the only option upfront is old man Falcao. The squad seems like a decent fit for 433, and being a below-average team, I guess there would be a lot of space behind the defensive line. It is probably not an ideal situation for such a player, do you think there is any other role someone like him can perform?

I'd want some pace from somewhere in the frontline so from either from the striker or at least one of the two wide players. Falcoa you say? I don't know his FM profile at all but imagine he's still a great out and out striker, playing him as a Poacher with a couple of wide players with some some pace, agility and creativity should work out well, try and feed him the ball and let him find the back of the net   

[jdubsnz]

great thread @Johnny Ace ! Trying to replicate the Odegaard, Saka, Benny Blanco interaction for Arsenal.  Have just put this together (haven't used it yet) but wanted to see if this is looking like a decent base (with Jesus as the creative striker)?

 

Edited May 10, 2023 by jdubsnz

[HanziZoloman]

The APa beside the Ws is amazing 

[Johnny Ace]

Looking good there @jdubsnz, the WB(A) stands out though for me, with the MEZZ on his side of the pitch. You're Arsenal so you'll probably be alright most of the time, just keep your eye on it. My preferred set up would be a FB(S) with a DLP(S) 

 

[Dogfacedgremlin]

As others mentioned before, great thread!

 

Can you give me your thoughts on my tactic below plz? @Johnny Ace

 

[jdubsnz]

11 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

Looking good there @jdubsnz, the WB(A) stands out though for me, with the MEZZ on his side of the pitch. You're Arsenal so you'll probably be alright most of the time, just keep your eye on it. My preferred set up would be a FB(S) with a DLP(S) 

 

thank you - made that slight tweak and beat Man U 3-1 :-)

[HanziZoloman]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb Dogfacedgremlin:

As others mentioned before, great thread!

 

Can you give me your thoughts on my tactic below plz? @Johnny Ace

 

It’s not looking like a close together unit trio in midfield. I‘d suggest changes there but if you are successful it’s good. I‘d place the BWM in MC and in DM would go with a simple ball distributor like DMd (WB left and right) or DLPd

[Johnny Ace]

13 hours ago, Dogfacedgremlin said:

As others mentioned before, great thread!

 

Can you give me your thoughts on my tactic below plz? @Johnny Ace

I've tried to demonstrate in this thread that I like to either send the midfield forward or the backs. In a 4-4-2, I wouldn't have both backs go forward as well as one of the midfield, it's about striking a balance in all footballing shapes to me and I try to apply that when building a tactic

If you're a top team, you can get away with more, ie the other team are less likely to attack you and your players are most likely to be good enough to cover the short comings 

If your tactic is winning games and playing well and you're happy with it @Dogfacedgremlin (love the username bwt )  then stick with it but if you're having problems ie losing games and getting "FMd" then give the first page of the thread a read. I'd strip the tactic back and tone down the roles, I think with the Wingbacks, I'd be looking at the CM and DM roles mainly     

[FMSacchi]

Brilliant thread! I like your thought process on how roles and duties interact and how keeping it simple actually makes it a more dynamic system than loads of fancy roles and PI's

Whilst reading and looking at your different set ups I couldn't help but wonder how you would set up the old Sarri Napoli system as this seems to go against (in my mind) your thought process. I try to recreate this every year and I only made it work to a certain extent on last year's version.

The main positions that would be a 'problem' for me are LB, LCM and LW as these go against your set ups in my opinion and also depending on if you were going for the scorer striker (Higuain) or creative striker (Mertens).

If possible I'd like to hear your opinion on how you would set this up and potentially the rest of the roles also?

 

[Johnny Ace]

Thanks @FMSacchi

I'm not too familiar with Napoli under Sarri I'm afraid, I'll have to a look 

This is by no means the definitive 4-3-3 DM thread, it's more aimed at people maybe new to the game or having some issues, either start out nice and simple or simplify what they have. If Sarri and your interpretation of Sarri take a different approach, that's great  

 

[FMSacchi]

Apologies if it came across in that manner. What I meant was your thread tells you how roles interact and the thought process behind it where as other threads normally go this is my system and this is how I play without going into why they do.

Yours is very much I do this because of xyz and due to this is makes creating an intricate system that much easier because we know how roles interact and we don't need loads of instructions to make it work that way.

There are quite a few peices on Sarri's Napoli out there but the way I see it would be

SK- Support

RB- Fb support

CBs- Cd defend

LB- Fb attack

Dm- dlp defend/support

Rcm- cm support

Lcm- mezz support/attack

Rw- winger attack

Lw- if/iw support

St- Higuain Af attack or Mertens Dlf attack/support

 

 

 

 

[Johnny Ace]

 

4 minutes ago, FMSacchi said:

Apologies if it came across in that manner. What I meant was your thread tells you how roles interact and the thought process behind it where as other threads normally go this is my system and this is how I play without going into why they do.

No worries  I've seen loads of 4-3-3 DMs that look a bit crazy to me that are successful but I've also seen a lot of 4-3-3 DMs that look crazy and they aren't which was part of the reason why I started the thread

 

9 minutes ago, FMSacchi said:

Yours is very much I do this because of xyz and due to this is makes creating an intricate system that much easier because we know how roles interact and we don't need loads of instructions to make it work that way.

My "base" 4-3-3 DMs, if you like, don't consider attributes and player ability, they're very much meant as cookie cutter tactics, like a starting point. As you play games, the tactic evolves and if it falls apart, you go back to basics. Solidity, creativity, runners, scorers, combinations, covering and attacking as many channels as you can, sort of thinking

13 minutes ago, FMSacchi said:

There are quite a few peices on Sarri's Napoli out there but the way I see it would be

SK- Support

RB- Fb support

CBs- Cd defend

LB- Fb attack

Dm- dlp defend/support

Rcm- cm support

Lcm- mezz support/attack

Rw- winger attack

Lw- if/iw support

St- Higuain Af attack or Mertens Dlf attack/support

I'd have no problem with that, depending on how you set the roles and duties. It's fairly conservative with the backs, I'd maybe swap the roles in midfield so the MEZZ has the FB(S) and W(A) on his half of the pitch but it's fine, give it a few games then tweak it as you go  

[Cloud9]

8 hours ago, FMSacchi said:

Apologies if it came across in that manner. What I meant was your thread tells you how roles interact and the thought process behind it where as other threads normally go this is my system and this is how I play without going into why they do.

Yours is very much I do this because of xyz and due to this is makes creating an intricate system that much easier because we know how roles interact and we don't need loads of instructions to make it work that way.

There are quite a few peices on Sarri's Napoli out there but the way I see it would be

SK- Support

RB- Fb support

CBs- Cd defend

LB- Fb attack

Dm- dlp defend/support

Rcm- cm support

Lcm- mezz support/attack

Rw- winger attack

Lw- if/iw support

St- Higuain Af attack or Mertens Dlf attack/support

 

 

 

 

Sarri ball was all about verticality and playing through the DM from the CB pairing I think. It didn't work out at Chelsea since the center backs weren't good on the ball,  in short passes and line breaking passes, forcing the possession wide. You should definitely run a double BPD for a recreation attempt. 

• You might need to play around with the DLP so he will look to turn and progress the ball when he receives it instead of recycling possession. Maybe give a Regista a run?

Its vertically has also led to its popularity declining in recent years. It's dependent on the opposition coming at them to play the ball through, but what teams started to do increasingly was sit back and defend. The vertically of the attack, originally it's strength, made it very difficult to break down a mid/low block opposition. That's all fine, but the current Match Engine weaknesses are the set ups strengths: 

• Baiting/playing through a press is really difficult in the current ME, and usually ends in disaster (at least in my experiments). Playing through the center of the pitch in the current match engine is quite difficult to accomplish as well.

Edited May 12, 2023 by Cloud9

[_mxrky]

How would you set this up with a ml/mr instead of an aml/amr? Especially since there wouldn’t really be a front 3 as such

[FMSacchi]

On 12/05/2023 at 18:37, Cloud9 said:

Sarri ball was all about verticality and playing through the DM from the CB pairing I think. It didn't work out at Chelsea since the center backs weren't good on the ball,  in short passes and line breaking passes, forcing the possession wide. You should definitely run a double BPD for a recreation attempt. 

• You might need to play around with the DLP so he will look to turn and progress the ball when he receives it instead of recycling possession. Maybe give a Regista a run?

Its vertically has also led to its popularity declining in recent years. It's dependent on the opposition coming at them to play the ball through, but what teams started to do increasingly was sit back and defend. The vertically of the attack, originally it's strength, made it very difficult to break down a mid/low block opposition. That's all fine, but the current Match Engine weaknesses are the set ups strengths: 

• Baiting/playing through a press is really difficult in the current ME, and usually ends in disaster (at least in my experiments). Playing through the center of the pitch in the current match engine is quite difficult to accomplish as well.

Thanks for the advice and apologies for the late reply.

I've went with two BPDs and a DLP support and I've added more risky passes but kept the passing as short as possible which seems to do the forward and back passes between defence and midfield to bait the opposition.

My main issue is the bluntness in attack, having a striker on a support duty doesn't score enough and when he's on an attack duty it's just long balls over the top to run onto.

[Cloud9]

8 hours ago, FMSacchi said:

Thanks for the advice and apologies for the late reply.

I've went with two BPDs and a DLP support and I've added more risky passes but kept the passing as short as possible which seems to do the forward and back passes between defence and midfield to bait the opposition.

My main issue is the bluntness in attack, having a striker on a support duty doesn't score enough and when he's on an attack duty it's just long balls over the top to run onto.

You could try a DLF(a)?I think Higuain was brought in for his hold up play under Sarri to fit the system.

The Napoli iteration (and most successful) of Sarri ball  featured an IF(s/a) on the left and W(s) on the right.

I think the IF(s) is probably the most faithful to the IRL system (players circling back to come towards the ball in buildup), but I would recommend the IF(a) for that front 3 in game

 @Johnny Ace illustrates how to set up the front 3 with a supporting striker up top as well

Edited May 15, 2023 by Cloud9

[Johnny Ace]

On 13/05/2023 at 23:38, _mxrky said:

How would you set this up with a ml/mr instead of an aml/amr? Especially since there wouldn’t really be a front 3 as such

That's more a 4-1-4-1 DM isn't it? I probably go with a full on goalscorer or creative/ goalscorer up top then one or two players from midfield on attack, different to a 4-3-3 DM in that it's more naturally defensive, same principles would apply though    

[JimbobWWFC]

Wow. I read this thread this morning and made a few notes on things I wanted to try out based on what was being recommended. It has been a fantastic thread so far, and I have created a hybrid of 2-3 suggestions from @Johnny Ace

I know we're only playing Young Boys and we should be winners anyway... but this is crazy! I have left the match at half-time to type this!

I actually fielded a weaker team because we play Man City next (e.g. I have rested Bellingham and Nuno Mendes, and Aseko Nkili isn't perfect for the BBM role - and it's 2030 so there are some newgens you won't know here), so I'm optimistic for more positive results going forwards.

Here are my results up to this point. Plenty of good results but I felt that something needed changing. Maybe this has done the trick! Thanks to everyone for their contributions in this thread! 

[HanziZoloman]

Hey guys,

do you change your tactics after a while or after some games? 

If so, what kind of changes do you address?